Is humanity ready to get access to the "secrets" of the Universe... extra-terrestrial contact, sources of unlimited energy, vacations in the Pleiads, doing lunch with Ra...

I was watching "Enterprise" last Monday on the Sci-Fi channel on satellite, and an advertisement came up for WCW Wrestling, which they now show on Sci-Fi (what wrestling has to do with Sci-Fi is a complete mystery to me). Here, we have big, hulky guys beating each other to a pulp for the entertainment of the masses, being broadcast out into space so everyone in the Solar Neighborhood can see what kind of planet and people we have here.

I also watched some of these "disclosure" videos about UFOs, and how these people like to get up on their podium (aka "soap box") and demand that the government tell all, so they can put and end to disease, poverty and the latest, "fix" the Earth that we've destroyed with global warming and pollution. Very noble causes... but it occurs to me that 99.9% of the people don't have any idea how these systems actually work or connect with one another, so their attempt to "fix" it will probably result in a worse situation, as the Atlanteans discovered with their "free power" grid.

One was pledging to bring "free power" into every home. But consequences never seem to be considered. With free power, there is no need for the estimated 250 million people, worldwide, who work for energy companies to be employed anymore. And with that many on the dole, the economic system could not handle it, so taxation and government regulation will move to an all-time high, which will destroy the economic base of the industrialized countries.

All this pro-Earth bluster sounds good, but would you turn over your business's finances to your 2-year-old kid? That is what I am starting to see behind a lot of the rationale for "cover-ups"... just look at the attitudes of the people demanding the covers be blown off.

And after reviewing a lot of UFO-related material over this last week, I find myself tending to agree with this "conspiracy of silence". Can you imagine what would happen to the world religions should their "gods" return, blazing thrones and all, just to discover that They were nothing more than a shoe salesman in a 4th density shopping mall?

The "Truth" may be out there, but can mankind deal with it?
Like it or not, mankind does have a LONG history of "what cannot be understood must be destroyed."

As part of this mass of humanity that has been kept "out of the loop", what is your view?

one of the biggest concerns I've had since coming into contact with the Ra material is whether or not I actually have accessed information of truth that many others have not and, if so, what responsibility do I bear with this?

If we consider ourselves ancients, the big brothers and sisters of this planet, then we have to consider what is most responsible - and in my opinion, the law of confusion is still paramount. Preserve the mystery and it preserves, to some extent, our ability to move freely. This is real big issue - but how much can we anticipate? Is it more honorable to peel back the veil of history without so much as a warning or preserve and not be forthcoming? Like the wanderers forum, I don't think we should actively say no, actively lie - so the question is how are we the most cautious and careful in anticipation of the worst of consequences? and for who? for us or for the billions of other people on this planet who, as we see it, can't deal with the infinite spectrum of consciousness?

Would it be honorable to suddenly make a frog aware of itself to the degree a 3rd density human is? I think that work must be taken slowly, its the alchemy of consciousness, and any sudden and intense motions usually end up destroying the mixture.

at the same time, in dealing with 'shocking' things like divorce, or adoption - most people find and most specialists agree that telling children is more helpful and responsible than lying or hiding the truth so that the children 'don't worry about anything'. At some level, I'd want to know and I'd want others to know - but again, anticipating the worst seems the most logical, but perhaps not the most honorable. What gets us into 4th density, strong logic or strong honor?

Alluvion wrote:I say, work with the mystery and law of confusion: if asked, disclosed, but do not advertise. Honorable and logical.

If this were the case, then two questions arise:

1) Whom do you ask?
2) What do you ask?

If someone was wondering if "Ra" was actually a serpentine demon, out to harvest the human race for slave labor and food, would they go their local, fundamentalist Baptist preacher for information? If information is being provided as a "response only" system, then nothing could be printed nor accessed via the public web, and then only select paragraphs in response to a specific question. It may be honorable and logical, but does it promote the evolution of consciousness?

And that begs the question OF the question... if you only know what you've been told, then you possess no alternate ideas to form a question to ask of the person you don't know to ask of.

What if the "truth out there" was SO different from what you've been taught, that virtually NONE of what you hold true is true anymore? What would the psyche base its view of reality on, since nothing could be interpreted as "real" anymore?

To quote Dr. Who:

If the next thing I say is true,
But the last thing I said was a lie,
Would you believe me?

my responses posit us as having access to information that almost everyone else on the planet does not. So I am thinking about this from the position of our responsiblity as attendants/guides/stewards, what have you. I think we may go to each other with questions, but my anticipatory reading of the question is what do WE do when we are asked these questions by people who are now dealing with information we've had time to acclimate too - given our adjacency to the ra material and fermentation in our imaginations.

"If someone was wondering if "Ra" was actually a serpentine demon, out to harvest the human race for slave labor and food, would they go their local, fundamentalist Baptist preacher for information? If information is being provided as a "response only" system, then nothing could be printed nor accessed via the public web, and then only select paragraphs in response to a specific question. It may be honorable and logical, but does it promote the evolution of consciousness? "

but again, we can't be available to everyone to answer every question every way it is intended to be heard. We are not responsible for everyone - everyone is responsible for themselves, ultimately. The law of confusion works for this and I think its responsible of us to align with that. If we sit in that realm of confusion those who have it in them to shift consciousness will, by the grace of mystery and insight as has happened in the past, come to us or other sources of information. And perhaps nothing should be printed and posted on the internet any more than it is. If people come across antiquatis, they do. If they don't, they don't. Of this world and its people, what is our responsibility at this time?

"What would the psyche base its view of reality on, since nothing could be interpreted as "real" anymore? "
what is most familiar and safe. Though I would hope a catalyst of this nature would drop kick the subconsciouss into emptying a bit into the consciouss mind so that ancient wakes up as ancient, wanderer wakes up as wanderer, and seeker wakes up as seeker - in essence, the scene I always see when I tap into this 4th density business is like the lid of a great box (pandora's no doubt) being lifted off by an arm which materialized out of night sky and dissolves back into it.

Those great shining gods who would marshall the ignorant human animals into willful slavery will place themselves as the ultimate end, the answer, to all mystery - and therefore, reveal themselves as anything but. Those who consistently set the greater mystery of infinity as the background which envelopes all things serve others more than themselves.

When you don't know, respond with 'i don't know'. When you don't care, respond with 'i don't care'.

At the end of it all, death holds the reigns to reset the life of an individual and free them unto themselves. Can these beings keep a person alive and under servitude for an eternity? Can they trap their consciousness and prevent them from their free will choice to die and exit the arena? Third density, supposedly, prevents this so that each is truly unto his or her own. But I am imaging just one scenario. Would it come down to doing what you beleive is best even it means your death or torture from the gods of old?

I agree with LB. Probably the best plan is for the "truth" to be gradually introduced to the public and this is what appears to be happening anyway, probably by design. BTW, the whole alien-as-"savior" idea is degrading to humanity. We can be better stewards of this world if we ever learn that cooperation is more effective than competition. However, in that asking is a conscious choice, then asking for quick solutions (in the form of alien saviors) would not be a free-will violation. Therefore, if too much alien-reality crept in to the mass mind and that mass mind was looking for alien parents to fix things...

I answered the poll this morning before reading LB's intro or subsequent discussions. I believe that people have the right to know. Not suprisingly, our "ethical preferences"--if, indeed, they are relevant in this question--are different for each of the 16 MBTI personality types.

Also, from 30 years' experience in getting people to do things in management consulting, I know that 1) the actual process of releasing the information and 2) the public, at large, becoming awarewould take many years due to a number of factors such as: selecting what to release, selecting appropriate channels of information distribution, the ability and timing of the media to promulgate the information, access of the public to media including the internet, and more importantly, the readiness or willingness of Joe-Sixpack to even care about the new information. Rolling out the information is not as easy as just posting it once on the internet.

When more people are interested in Donald Trump getting his head shaved due to the outcome of a wrestling match in a football stadium or Anna Nicole's ride to the cemetary this morning than, for example, improving the plight of returning servicemen to Walter Reed hospital, they probably have a fairly low tolerance or interest in metaphysics and service to others.

The way I see it, people are just not ready to take it in. I have tried posting some stuff on one of my Email groups of all the guys who have gone into IIT, and it achieved nothing else other than to earn me a name of "UFO buff".

So, what we could do is use our discretion in sharing the information with those close to us, and if we want to put out the info on the sites, like antiquatis or lawofone or personal, go right ahead and do so, as those who are ready for the info will find their way to it. And with the number of web pages on it nowadays, well, it wouldn't blow any lids.

Knowledge IS power, especially if one knows how to use it So might as well be careful.

LoneBear wrote:As part of this mass of humanity that has been kept "out of the loop", what is your view?

If one is ready and wants to know the truth. Only one ill decide.

LoneBear wrote:And after reviewing a lot of UFO-related material over this last week, I find myself tending to agree with this "conspiracy of silence". Can you imagine what would happen to the world religions should their "gods" return, blazing thrones and all, just to discover that They were nothing more than a shoe salesman in a 4th density shopping mall?

If they know the truth, they'll go, laughing all the way to the mall and expect the shoes to be free.

But is "knowing" a "right"? Rights are inalienable, but knowledge isn't. Knowledge is acquired.

I think it is more a situation of a "right to discovery", which is a defined, legal right. You don't have a right to know, but you do have a right to find out for yourself.

And that is where it falls apart, as people are being prevented from discovery.

Democratic and republican governments have a duty to inform the people of what they have discovered, since they used the resources of the people to do the research, on behalf of the people.

In other forms of government, the people are subservient to the body politic, and hence those governments do not have a similar obligation to tell anything to their slaves.

So you can tell the actual form of government that exists, regardless of what they call it, by their behavior.

Eccles wrote:Not suprisingly, our "ethical preferences"--if, indeed, they are relevant in this question--are different for each of the 16 MBTI personality types.

I would be curious to see the breakdown of that.

Eccles wrote:Rolling out the information is not as easy as just posting it once on the internet.

There were supposed to be rolling it out over the last 50 years, but did not do it. As a result, people do not have the necessary background information to deal with what is now going on. Quite honestly, I'd like to see some of these "Disclosure" people just get it all... I'll bet their own audiences would lock them up for insanity, the moment they tried to relate it!

Eccles and LoneBear wrote:Eccles: I believe that people have the right to know.

LoneBear: But is "knowing" a "right"? Rights are inalienable, but knowledge isn't. Knowledge is acquired.

LoneBear, I was just responding to your poll. You formulated the questions. Some market researches spend much of their workday formulating survey questions that are neither duplicates nor biased. I like to think of creating poll or survey questions as both an art and a science.

LoneBear's poll wrote:Is Humanity ready to have the "truth" disclosed?
Yes, we have a right to know everything!

lets use an analogy here - is this information like "look out, a tidal wave is coming your way" or "did you know that we evolved trees?"

The first is a threat to survival and so, not dismissable. Would you want to know if a huge tidal wave was heading your way?

The second is just another set of facts, like the tidal wave, but not a threat to your survival - would you care to know about it?

For me it comes down to the question of survival - if you have information that could help people save themselves what do you about it? If it is not a question of survival but instead a question of knowledge then i say let people come to it in their own time.

The question reminds me of this Men in black quote:"There's always an Arquillian Battle Cruiser, or a Corillian Death Ray, or an intergalactic plague that is about to wipe out all life on this miserable little planet, and the only way these people can get on with their happy lives is that they DO NOT KNOW ABOUT IT!"
But if you consider the progress of technology, loss of jobs to mechanized industry in inevidable, it has happened and will continue to. I have my ideal for the world, that needs are provided and sustainable wants are added on top. Jobs would be fewer but such would be akin to national service (that some countries run there military) to which people will earn their proportion of luxury and spend there lives persuing passions, according to their types, and to the betterment of the self and/or humanity, whatever they so choose.
Of course you are then faced with the situation of specialty occupations, that some people would be required to their skill and task, that they do not get this limited time "national service" idea, as they are too vital and they need to work much of their lives for society to best function. Such I suppose could only be compensated by privilages the vast many do not receive, such as un-sustainable wants.
But as far as the original question goes, people would require not only an interest in an issue, but also the ability to grasp it in the conceptual sense before it becomes practical for them to be "granted top level clearance". Also is the problem of such people, who are in the know, leaking information to the press and public in the wonderful spirit of capitalism that so many of us embrace.
Basically if you have secrets then the opportunities for exploitation, one way or the other, exist and this "rocks the boat" but full disclosure may well prove to be a case of panic and mass hysteria ala War of the worlds, enough to "tip the boat over".

Raytrek wrote:The question reminds me of this Men in black quote:"There's always an Arquillian Battle Cruiser, or a Corillian Death Ray, or an intergalactic plague that is about to wipe out all life on this miserable little planet, and the only way these people can get on with their happy lives is that they DO NOT KNOW ABOUT IT!"

This quote makes many assumptions about people that aren't necessarily true in an objective way. To link in another thread a bit (viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1161&p=8834#p8834), the "schooling" that is received by most people (in the West anyway) is designed that way or for that outcome.

Raytrek wrote:But if you consider the progress of technology, loss of jobs to mechanized industry in inevidable, it has happened and will continue to.

While this appears to be the path that humanity is on, it is not the only available one and certainly not inevitable. There are choices that can be made. The word inevitable implies that choice is gone and I don't think it has.

Raytrek wrote:But as far as the original question goes, people would require not only an interest in an issue, but also the ability to grasp it in the conceptual sense before it becomes practical for them to be "granted top level clearance". Also is the problem of such people, who are in the know, leaking information to the press and public in the wonderful spirit of capitalism that so many of us embrace.
Basically if you have secrets then the opportunities for exploitation, one way or the other, exist and this "rocks the boat" but full disclosure may well prove to be a case of panic and mass hysteria ala War of the worlds, enough to "tip the boat over".

The opportunity of a slow release of information is largely past. At some point, "full disclosure" will happen though it won't be truly full disclosure. There is way too much information that would be involved with a full disclosure for it to really happen in a short amount of time anyway. I think it is just the opportunity to start discussing openly these things without ridicule (or worse). It would be years before those not currently involved would gain a good background in what has been happening over the past 50 years versus the open history that is taught. Beware of those that promise or offer instant understanding without any effort on your part.

The opportunity of a slow release of information is largely past. At some point, "full disclosure" will happen though it won't be truly full disclosure. There is way too much information that would be involved with a full disclosure for it to really happen in a short amount of time anyway. I think it is just the opportunity to start discussing openly these things without ridicule (or worse). It would be years before those not currently involved would gain a good background in what has been happening over the past 50 years versus the open history that is taught. Beware of those that promise or offer instant understanding without any effort on your part.

True to a point but you must also factor in that those in control like to remain in control and keep a lot of information hidden for their own agenda. Anything that is disclosed will only be to further some goal or used to hide the REAL truth even more.

As for open history that is taught, I know that even a majority of taught history is a lie or part truth peppered with lies all around it to keep people from guessing and uncovering what is really going on. History and chronology have been covered up much more than most realise and for much longer.

See above, it would be nice to think that Governments and the Military would grow a conscience and be open about everything happening on this planet but it is not the way they work, or have ever worked. Knowledge is power and if you keep the knowledge to yourself and nobody knows then you retain control of any situation. Weather control is a prime example.

Disclosure also comes with baggage for those disclosing their secrets, nobody will trust them afterwards as any full disclosure would be chock full of shocking and paradigm shattering revelations that would send most into a meltdown.

Those that get close to the truth also often end up going missing or dying very quickly of unusual and fast acting cancer, take Lloyd Pye's brilliant research and intervention theory or Karla Turner's uncovering of Military abductions and UFO's for example. Unfortunately it is often the very smart researchers who disclose too much truth in their own research findings that end up being taken out. Recently i've been unable to get in touch with WeatherWar101 who has stopped producing anything for months now and I fear the worst, again he was another who had hit the nail on the head and I just hope that he's taking a break and hasn't gone missing...

Disclosure will not be happening any time soon and full disclosure will never happen, there is too much at stake for those in control and too much power to give up willingly. Anyone disclosing too much will often not be around to do so for much longer, especially if their research gets very popular and more people take notice of it.

As Arcelius quite rightly said "Beware of those that promise or offer instant understanding without any effort on your part."

You are best to do the research yourself or learn more angles of enquiry from like-minded individuals who can add to your own knowledge. Disclosure is also much more satisfying this way when you figure out something for yourself after putting in lots of effort reading and researching, instead of being handed it on a plate full of holes.